mspaintadventuresfandomcom-20200224-history
Talk:Class/Archive 1
Knight/Seer Pair People are putting on the page that the Knight and Seer classes are active/passive counterparts because Aradia said that a Knight and a Seer are a powerful combo. I think what she meant was that one of the two is active, and the other passive. Or maybe she was talking about their aspects? AnimeApprentice 09:16, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :I think you are absolutely right. I highly doubt knight and seer are active/passive counterparts. Sure one of them is probably active and the other passive, but I doubt they are each other's counterparts. That they are a good combination is a hint that they aren't counterparts if anything. Just imagine how shitty a rouge and thief combo would be. "Hey I'll steal something and use it on me, and then you'll steal something...and use it on...me..."bitterLime 10:10, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :Yup. Although Aradia could have also been talking about their aspect (but then again, she could have used "heroes") since Rose knows about what actions would benefit the session while Dave has an understading of time. Following your theory above, isn't it fairly implied that both Seers and Knights are passive heroes? AnimeApprentice 12:08, March 18, 2012 (UTC) ::I don't think it has any implications about Seers and Knights. What I meant to say is simply that active and passive counterparts paired together make for a kind of pointless combo. There are strong implications that Seers are passive, the way aradia and scratch describe them are pretty clear on that. I'm not so sure about knights, but I don't think deductions can be made from the fact that a seer of light and a knight of time are a good team. Because as you said, the aspects play a role in this too.bitterLime 12:21, March 18, 2012 (UTC) ::Yeah, a good pairing ≠ passive/active counterparts. However this whole conversation and recent edits to the page make me think Knight/Heir are probably passive/active counterparts. Knights protect other players through their aspect, Heirs protect themselves through their aspect. The Light6 12:35, March 18, 2012 (UTC) Templates for classes I was thinking that maybe we could add generic grey templates of the outfits to each class. I made two example versions, one with dark grey shoes and one with green shoes. The one with dark grey shoes is more in line with the idea of a template, but the one with green shows pays respect to the fact that the shoes always have a different colour from the outfit. Do we want to do something like this? and if yes, what color do we use for the shoes? Ofcourse we could only do it for Heir, Knight, Seer, Witch and Maid for now, if we want to stay 100% Canon. We could also add thief, based on our Vriska god tier sprite, but let's not forget that the lower half of that is fan made.bitterLime 21:35, March 18, 2012 (UTC) Sounds like a cool idea. experimentalDeity 22:41, March 18, 2012 (UTC) I think this sounds like a really cool idea. Maybe eventually we can get palettes in here too. But at the very least, official templates sound really cool. Majora 787 02:27, March 19, 2012 (UTC) Gallery : View the current version of the talk page to see the gallery. Template discussion Okay I made the others. I went for green shoes because it looks less boring and shows that the shoe's are usually a different colour from the outfit. It's no big deal to change it to dark grey though.bitterLime 08:37, March 19, 2012 (UTC) I added the thief to the gallery. It's less canon than the others, the lower half is based on terezi's redglare outfit, because those boots look nearly identical in hero mode. I'd say about 90% of the thief is canon, the rest should be a good guess. Not sure if we want to use it though, but I guess yes, since we are also using vriska's god tier outfit, and that was made the same way.bitterLime 09:35, March 19, 2012 (UTC) Who's the douchebag in the snug pumpkin pants? I made this one more for fun really. All of it is guesswork, although some of it is based on existing things. I advise against using that one on the main page. But I figured I might as well place it here.bitterLime 15:18, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :On Vriska's godtier's sprite's wings, we have seen them and . The Light6 09:21, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :Yeah I know, but the wings the sprite we use had were nothing like those, and they are difficult to extract because of their transparancy. I could try to do it, but as far as I am concerned her sprite is okay without them.bitterLime 09:26, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :And a part of the wing is obscured by her desk in the first link, by snow in the second. experimentalDeity 12:06, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :I may be wrong about this, but aren't the shoes generally the same for every class regardless of aspect? I mean, you can swap them out, but Karkat and Dave both had the same shoes in god tier... And on a slightly unrelated note, I had seen Hero Mode templates for god tier like this where they made Aspect-dependent areas a bright neon green? That may be an idea we could use. And by aspect dependent I mean the Knight's pants stripe and the Seer's... design thing. 17:19, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :Yes, you are in fact slightly wrong about the shoes. Fef has tyranian purple slippers, Jade has ruby slippers. Eridan has purple slippers, while Dirk has teal ones (at least in UU's drawing). The Trolls all have god tier shoes in the colour of their dream self shoes. The humans all had shoes in the color of the aspect that was introduced alongside with their aspect in the shop (i.e. light and breath, time and space, heart and mind etc). Dave and Karkat both having grey shoes was more of a coincidence, not the rule. :By aspect-dependent you mean things that are in the exact same colour as the chest emblem? I considered doing that, but then it occured to me that it's not 100% reliable. For example Fef has sock stripes in her emblem colour, but Jade has light grey stripes, not white ones like you would expect from her symbol (although that's similar enough I guess?). So I didn't bother with it because I couldn't be 100% sure, in most cases those things are white in my sprites though (although there are some things that are white and not meant to represent the emblem colour). I suppose I could fix this if we ever can establish some clear pattern on this stuff.bitterLime 17:54, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :I figured that Eridan and Feferi had changed shoes at some point. I mean you ARE allowed to mix and match clothing with the outfit. Since Karkat and Dave had the same shoes, and Dave had them right after ascencion, I just figured that the shoes that CAME with the outfit were standard. But I dunno. :And yeah by aspect-dependent I mean the stuff the color of the emblem. I think Space is somewhat of an exception because WHITE on gray would be sort of... harder to work with. I think the gray on gray was just used because it's the weird one out among aspect color schemes. But that's just my two cents. Majora 787 21:32, March 19, 2012 (UTC) I was compelled to do a bard template as well now that the clownish design is even more canon than before. Yeah, no cod piece...there's just not enough room on the sprite...and I couldn't be bothered.:B And ofcourse, while the bard get up is canon now, this template is not, since I made it (except for the shoes, which I modified from someone elses bard sprite, because I thought they were pretty much spot on). I will laugh if the next update shows Gamzee in sprite mode...well at least in that case I'd see if my template was close to being accurate or not.bitterLime 17:04, April 16, 2012 (UTC) Now why didn't you create this thing earlier? I could've done with that hood design! Come on! MadHatter121 19:23, April 16, 2012 (UTC) Haha. Sorry, I didn't bother before because of the whole ambigious canon thing. Feel free to use it now though if you want.:) This is an amazing template for the bard god tier but it seems like the outfit in the pic of Gamzee is a one-piece separated by a cod piece, not a shirt and pants but hey, this is all speculation. -- 22:29, April 16, 2012 (UTC) :I feel Gamzee is going to be in an symbolic manner any second now. But I like the design you made. Maybe Hussies is reading this and will make it canon. :) Chezrush 01:32, April 17, 2012 (UTC) Thanks guys. Yeah it does look like it could be a one-piece, i should have added the cod piece, that would solve the problem, maybe I'll try to cram it in there some time. And @Chezrush: Haha I doubt Hussie would make it canon, but yeah we might see the bard in sprite mode soon, but I thought the same when we saw Aranea in god tier mode, and then hussie just changed to a different scene. ._.bitterLime 06:37, April 17, 2012 (UTC) Yeah, you were right Chezrush, we did get to see him. I made a new template based on the actual canon sprite. I added it to the gallery above and to the Class article. I am not sure if the colours are right...the rage colour scheme was confusing, it seems to be one where the hood is lighter than the outfit, as is the case with space. So I inverted the light and dark order for the generic template. The cod piece might always have the same colour as the colour of the symbol? Dunno.bitterLime 09:56, April 17, 2012 (UTC) Just throwing this out there. Do we plan on making/keeping hoodless templates? I am asking just because I think it would be good to have that kind of thing in the resources. I mean, yeah, we only have both versions for the Heir. Not counting the Thief and Maid, since Feferi and Vriska have big hair. 16:12, May 10, 2012 (UTC) I guess so... Unless we see another character who has one of the roles we counted for have a different outfit. --Chezrush 20:24, May 10, 2012 (UTC) So a sylph template was uploaded now as well. And someone added it to the page, I removed it for now. But I guess we have to discuss again wether or not we want to use the fanmade sprite estimates on revealed god tier outfits (that lack a canon sprite version). At the moment that would be the sylph and the prince. 07:26, July 11, 2012 (UTC) :I would be inclined to say no. It's not that easy to work out exactly how Hussie will draw the symbolic manner from the hero mode, and we sort of have no ''need to show the template when it doesn't exist yet anyway. We're a wiki, we document things that are known. Also we haven't actually seen the entirety of the Sylph outfit yet, have we? Almost all of it, but not all. We shouldn't really use an image where much of it is speculation on the precise details, and part of it is an outright guess ::I completely agree, just wanted to know what other people think. 17:35, July 12, 2012 (UTC) Okay, I took the sylph and page templates I had to remove from the article and placed them here. I just gathered all the fanmade sprites in a gallery. I don't know who made the page one, it's a good start but it could use some work. I'm not going to make a page sprite, I have a feeling we'll see Jake go god tier eventually anyway. 09:34, July 29, 2012 (UTC) I made that Sylph... Just thought I'd point out... I also added it that one time ago..-- FaeQueenCory (talk) 01:14, August 5, 2012 (UTC) Okay so I thought I'd make a mage, because why not. And that's also one we might not see for a good while. (Page, Prince and Rogue we'll hopefully see soon). 22:00, December 25, 2012 (UTC) Sick and have to stay in bed. So I did a rogue.*shrugs* 15:43, December 29, 2012 (UTC) Alternative template look Okay so since the template topic above is huge I'll just open a new section for this. I think we discussed this shortly once before, but didn't really conclude it. I am talking about god tier outfits featuring some details in the symbol colour (for example the stripe on the pants of the knight, or the cod piece of a bard). So here is a proposal on how to update the templates to reflect that more precisely. I think we should do this and I prepared the other templates if we want to do it. The only downside I can see is that the templates just don't look as nice anymore, maybe other colours would help to make them look nicer again, but I tried to avoid all the colours that are already used on existing god tier colour schemes. 17:37, November 10, 2012 (UTC) :You've certainly got my vote, it looks nice 03:21, December 11, 2012 (UTC) Sylph? It's implied that Sylph is a counterpart of the Witch aspect. If Witch could be defined as "one who manipulates their aspect to benefit others" then the same could probably be said for Sylph, except for themselves. But if that's the defenition, how do you guys think Kanaya lived up to her title as the Sylph of Space? By that speculatory definition, Kanaya would be able to manipulate her size and velocity. If she did either of those ever, she manipulated her velocity after her revival as a drinker to barge in on the 3x Showdown Combo. Just my two cents. 17:19, March 22, 2012 (UTC) Page? I can't help but notice, but when I checked out the article, there was no Page class. Has anyone looked into this? Strife2816 00:23, March 30, 2012 (UTC) :While this has been dealt with I'll leave a quick explanation of why it was missing, simply, lack of info. The Page has to currently be one of the most unexplained classes so far. The Light6 09:41, March 31, 2012 (UTC) Mostly unrelated, but a page has the power... of NO PANTS. Coincidence ? I think not. Also, my sincerest apologies to every Page cosplayer during harsh winters. 09:38, February 9, 2013 (UTC) Active and Passive pairs It would not make sense for a Bard and a Prince to be negative and postive of one another. In the olden days, the Bard served to entertain royals....such as a PRINCE or an HEIR. What other class also "serves for the benfit or entertainemnt of a royal"? OH RIGHT a PAGE. :| Either keep the classes separate or wait until the negative and positive pairs are revealed to start pairing them up. Albel-is-MINE 21:15, April 17, 2012 (UTC) I am afraid this is going to be embarassing for you, but Prince/Bard is a confirmed active/passive pair. UU flat out .bitterLime 21:56, April 17, 2012 (UTC) oh holy shit how did I miss that Dx yes, this is the egg. it is on my face. ...Hussie, this makes no sense. But it's his thing, not mine. ......still, though. wth. that's...contradictory...I mean Rogue and Theif were pretty obvious....what...does a Bard have in common with a Prince? By webster dictionary standards, not the Homestuck mythos. gosh I...what. Thanks, anyway. I'll be one my way now %D Albel-is-MINE 07:47, April 18, 2012 (UTC) So with the whole active/passive thing, it seems like in every one of these the article is saying "But it COULD be passive because it's not entirely useless to the rest of the team!" I give as an example Aradia as the maid of time. From what's been seen, Jane bringing herself back to life, and Aradia multiplying herself and defending herself through time it seems pretty active. Just because passive classes are based around effecting others doesn't mean that active can't have any effect on other classes at all. I had this explained to me in a way that makes sense; Active and passive pairs form a line where, the more active or self-serving the more active and self-serving the passive counterpart is. So the Maid could be passive, but that would mean the active would have to be more active. Even though in my personal opinion, Sylph(+) and Maid(-) makes sense to me. 14:04, May 3, 2012 (UTC) I like the idea of pairing up active and passive counterparts together. All of the sections, when the pairs are revealed, should be grouped like the Prince/Bard section, and we could have a picture of each class's costume on either side of the writing. Aepokk Venset 00:10, May 10, 2012 (UTC) :And the Thief/Rogue section, but yeah I am fairly sure when that comes the sections will be merged without question. The Light6 01:07, May 10, 2012 (UTC) The real contradictory part here is most notably the explanations between Rogue/Thief and Bard/Prince. When explaining Rogue/Thief UU described the dichotomy as " " While when explaining Prince/Bard UU describes it as " " Though she does go on to say how Bard's affect their party as a Wild Card... it just seems like the two should be more consistent. Also while on the speculation bandwagon, my thoughts on the subject are: Knight/Page, Mage/Heir, Sylph/Witch, and Seer/Maid. I will try to give both explanations of Active/Passive below. Knight/Page to me seem to be "Those who protect or are protected by their aspect". Knights seem to protect others around them with their aspect, as seen through Dave working as a "tank" while Jade was frog foraging. Pages on the other hand, such as Tavros's obsession with flight, are almost swaddled by their Aspect, in hopes of inspiring greater potential. Mage/Heir seem to both be majyyky. After attaining god tier, John is almost a wind-wizard with the Windy-Thing. Equius was never really seen using his powers, but it's safe to assume based on his ancestor that he had an aura of Void around him. Sollux, while having most of his powers inherently, did seem massively affected by Doom, seeing it, dying all the time. If I had to put my finger on it I'd say the two classes are "Those who influence or are influenced by their Aspect." Heir being the influencer and party aid, while Mage being the influenced and selfish one (much to Sollux's detriment). Sylph/Witch is more conjecture, though they too appear majyyky. Sylph appears to be a healing class, but maybe in a way more roundabout than simply stated. It's my thought that Sylph and Witch are "Those who transform or are transformed through Aspect". Aranea could Heal through enLightenment; whereas Feferi may have been "Transformed through her Life Aspect into a Healer". A bit of a stretch, but it leaves Sylph as Passive and Witch as Active. Maid/Seer both seem primarily support classes, or "Those who aid or are aided by their Aspect". Seer seems to aid others by seeing the future, whereas Maid appear to use their Aspect to their own goal, as Jane did in healing herself and Aradia did through arming a time army. It should be noted, as this explanation states both Maid and Seer as support classes that specifically how they affect/are-affected by their aspect is a very important yet subtle distinction. 06:31, June 6, 2012 (UTC) :Not going to comment on the speculation about the pairings but rather the apparent inconsistency in UU's differentiation of active and passive classes. First the whole quote about her first description is this: " " :Bolding for emphasis, the description of active classes benefiting themselves and passive benefiting others is a simplistic description of a much more complicated system of division that we have only seen a fraction of and that will become clearer as more pairings are revealed and fully explained. The Light6 07:38, June 6, 2012 (UTC) : On the subject of pairings... Shouldn't it be Mage/Seer- both having a deep understanding of their aspect? Knight/Page- using and defending via their aspect? Witch/Slyph- both manipulating their aspect via magic? Heir/Maid- both 'inheriting' some power over or through their aspect? This also allows for a neat 6/6 pairing of the 12 basic, with 1/1 master class pairing, AND follows thematic logic in both title and role.Dogstarrb (talk) 01:09, August 5, 2012 (UTC) :Now technically, not all of the classes' roles have been revealed yet. However I think you've come up with the best pairings yet, especially taking into account that Aranea said a Sylph is "like a witch but more magical". Not to mention, this gives us two male/male class pairings, two female/female class pairings, and three male/female class pairings (taking into account master classes) 06:38, August 5, 2012 (UTC) :In his Prospit and Derse explanation post Hussie strongly implied that both Heir and Maid are active, so they can't be paired really. Same goes for Page and Knight, who were both implied to be passive. So your pairs kinda make sense, but can't work if what Hussie implied is really true. Also please take speculation to the Forum:Frog_Temple, unless you feel like it should be included into the article. 08:32, August 5, 2012 (UTC) I made my own little thing for my theory/god tier tumblr. It's job description - Passive/Active . Pathmaker - Seer/Mage Manipulator - Sylph/Witch Exploiter - Knight/Heir Provider - Maid/Page Displacer - Rogue/Thief Destroyer - Bard/Prince Embodier/Influencer - Muse/Lord 02:15, December 10, 2012 (UTC) :Sounds like you took DnD 4e, and mixed it with classes. 17:18, December 13, 2012 (UTC) -- 20:21, February 10, 2013 (UTC) I don't agree with the Knight/Heir and Maid/Page pairings. According to Calliope, to exploit is simply what all active classes do; individual active classes exploit their aspect in a specific way (ex: Prince destroys or causes destruction with their aspect). Following the Active/Passive pairing format: It would make more sense to pair Knight/Page and Heir/Maid - in terms of naming schema, if a pairing can be summed up (which they can, incidentally) this makes the first pair "servants" and the second pair roughly could be categorized as "progeny". This appears to follow the pattern of naming conventions already established for known pairings (and the others you've suggested as well), in which Mage/Seer includes "wise-people" or "viziers" (in lay terms, "advisers"), Witch/Sylph is "magical" (going by Kanaya's definitions, if one is more magical then both can still be magical - so Witch exploits magic, the Sylph is magical), the Thief/Rogue pair refers to "outlaws" (Thief is Parasitic/Predatory, while Rogue seems to be more of a vigilante or crime-fighter), and Prince/Bard pair contains "destroyers" as "a Prince may destroy a kingdom or two with war or politics", while "the Bard may destroy with a joke or prank". Additionally, Lord/Muse can be summed up as "master" (both classes could be said to have a form of absolute influence over their aspect). Here is my version of the table. Formatting: Active/Passive Pair - Summary: Lord/Muse - Master Prince/Bard - Destroyer Thief/Rogue - Outlaw Witch/Sylph - Magician Mage/Seer - Vizier Knight/Page - Servant Heir/Maid - Progeny I think it is interesting to note that if you use any of these summaries in the phrase "X of their Aspect", they make a lot more sense. For example, "Servant of their Aspect" or "Progeny of their Aspect". The individual classes, on the other hand, expand on this by indicating more specifically how each class goes about its tendencies. Once again, using Calliope's formatting: Active classes Exploit/Cause their Aspect to benefit themselves. Summary: "One who (3rd person singular present verb) X, or causes (noun) through X." Passive classes Allow/Invite their Aspect to benefit others. Summary: "One who allows X to be (past participle verb), or invites (noun) through X." Maid Hey, I was reading the Maid section of this page, and I wanted to point out how no one seems to have remembered the other meaning of "maid". And I think this is important because it actually works VERY well for the class: "one who cleans/repairs their session via their aspect" This makes a lot of sense, in my opinion, due to Aradia's abusive use of time shenanigans to "save skum" 400 of herself into existence that was pivital to the troll's "victory". Her actions as Maid of Time helped preserve the required alpha timeline way more than Dave ever really did for the kids. (especially because it was hinted at if not absulutely revealed that "the voices of the dead" were actually herself) Further, Jane's autorevive of her dream!self also cleans up their game session because it ensures her ascention to godtier (before her death), but now due to her being dead as what happened in the alpha timeline... Her autorevive ensures her revival in Dirk:Syncronize. Personally, I find the "made" pun thing to be silly and make no real sense with regards to Aradia. But the maid being not short for maiden but just being maid (cleaning lady) fits. It also fits with this other class theory I have but that hinges on Lord being the Master Active Class. (basically that all the Active classes are "higher class/society" than the Passive pair. If Lord (a godhead) is the Master to Muse (a minor intermediating deity), then it works. And Heir (the inheirator of an estate, like a lord's son) would be the active to Maid's passive. But as of now it's just a theory.) -- FaeQueenCory 23:30, July 18, 2012 (UTC) The Maid being paired with Heir makes sense if you think of them both as Progeny (of their Aspect). If you look back to the feudal system (already heavily referenced by the Knight/Page and Prince/Bard titles), an Heir (male in any Patriarchal society) ensured the line would continue, while a Maid was any unattached female. Both, obviously, were somebody's children (thus why I summarize the pair as Progeny). The validity of puns being used to summarize the abilities of each individual class notwithstanding, class pairing summaries seem to keep to strict dictionary definitions. - 20:32, February 10, 2013 (UTC) Pre-Scratch Trolls Has it actually been confirmed what Nitram's and Zahhak's titles are? CannonSpectacle (talk) 05:24, September 30, 2012 (UTC) :AFAIK no. But it has been very strongly implied: only one configuration is compatible with the rules and classes Hussie has given. It remains possible that he's messing with us, and one of those two guys is a Lord or something. EskayFlying (talk) 06:10, September 30, 2012 (UTC) :What EskayFlying said - Really the only pre-scratch troll titles that haven't been explicitly confirmed are: Damara's, Nitram's and Zahhak's. :However in part 1 of Openbound it strongly hinted (but not directly stated) that she was the Witch of Time, given the subsequent title revelations no one really doubted this. :As for Nitram and Zahhak, the only classes left are Page and Rogue, however Tavros was already the Page which means the only person that class can go to is Zahhak, giving him Page of Void, and that leaves Rogue as the last class left which makes Nitram the Rogue of Breath. :Of course as EskayFlying said Hussie could pull a sneak move and double up on the Page of Breath title, or assign one of them Lord, or even reveal a completely new never before seen class(es) for them but given the A1 titles so far all those options I think are extremely unlikely and thus their titles are as good as confirmed. The Light6 (talk) 06:36, September 30, 2012 (UTC) Mage and Rogue outfits regarding the mage and rogue outfits in the most recent flash, the person who made them described them as "halfway canon". Basically, Hussie gave the pixelist leeway to do whatevs and since the pictures are so small it gives him leeway to go in and change things, so I guess they're sort of a rough draft of the to-be canon designs? Not sure how to go with that, just figured I should point it out. 12:24, November 7, 2012 (UTC) :Well, it's a simple enough statement. We should just mention that on the article My Theories Okay, so, let me just say that I have no clue what I am doing, and that this is my first time EVER editing a wiki. With that said, I believe I have cracked the Active/Passive Table on the front page of the 'Class' topic. Going from +7 to -7 we have Muse, Page, Knight, Rogue, Sylph, Bard, Seer, Mage, Prince, Witch, Thief, Heir, Maid, Lord. I got to this point by starting with this hypothesis "If Maid and Knight are paired through the idea of 'defending', which is Active and which is Passive?" A friend of mine, who helped me through this entire ordeal, suggested that Knight was active and I agreed when talking about Dave, but when talking about Karkat and his seemingly passive Aspect it seemed to me it was a more passive class; this brought me to ask "Does a players Aspect affect the activity of his/her Class?" We decided it was plausable depending on how rigid the Class was, and the front page of the Class Wiki said in such a way that we believed that +/-1 was the most mutable pair, and due the questionability of the Maid and Knight Classes, we believed that they were the +/-1 pair. But that didn't answer my first question. I then began to take notes on what classes were paired and how, as well as what classes weren't paired and how they were theorized to be paired. I found, using the same Class page that I am talking on, that only Seer and Mage were suspected to be paired, the Maid and Page were suspected to be paired, the Witch was suspected to be paired with the Sylph, Mage, and Heir, and the Knight was suspected to be paired with the Page and Heir. Using process of elimination I have determined that the Seer is + to the Mages -, the Witch is - to the Sylphs +, the Knight is + to the Heirs -, and that left the Maid and the Page being seen as either + or -. With the knowledge of how I believe them to be paired I began to fill the Table with a new goal, "Is the Mage + or -?" Muse and Lord were already placed, and with the belief that the most rigid of Classes being placed on the furthest ends I looked for as far as I could to place the Rogue and Thief. That only brought them to +/-4. Now, my belief is that they are the next most rigid so I began to question how the table was set up, but I kept my faith in the knowledge you all have gained and continued. I thought the Bard/Prince would fit on the furthest end, but the female setting on -6 ruined that idea. So, I looked at my options and realized that the only pairing that could have a Passive Male and an Active Female would be the Page/Maid pair. And with that realization I determined that everything else was questionable. The only thing I have truely determined is that the Page/Maid (+/- respectively) fits in the +/-6 slots. What do you all think? 20:09, December 19, 2012 (UTC)ABird I think your observations make alot of sense. What I 100% agree on is the way you determined what classes are active and what classes are passive. I share your theory on that and it's backed up by what Hussie said about the troll teams being very representative except for nepeta and vriska being swapped. But I don't agree with your order on the passive-active-spectrum. Mostly because Hussie once said that the witch is a very active class. But your scale is pretty much the only solution if paired classes are on opposing spots on the scale. However, we don't know wether or not that is actually the case, it would make sense ofcourse, but the fact that it would mean that the witch class is relatively close to the middle despite having been called "very active" makes me doubt that. Another thing to consider is that hussie said "the two most passive standart classes are male", now since knight has been shown to be not male exclusive (Latula is a Knight) and Hussie's statement was in a context of trying to show that the class system in Homestuck is not sexist...that would imply to me that those "two most passive standart classes" are male exclusive. That would leave the page and the bard on 6 and 5. But I guess the knight could have a strong male bias (similar to the thief and rogues female bias), so maybe the knight could go where you placed him. There is also more talk on this on the mspa wiki forum. 23:09, December 23, 2012 (UTC) Impending Maid info OK so I'm predicting that in a week or two we might be getting some exposition on Maid and its counterpart (plus their active/passive alignment). I am just going to straight up quote my MSPA Forum post of my prediction. :"OK so Roxy is currently going through trying to contact everyone about what is going to happen, which means she should soon be (attempting to) contacting Jane. Now we have already all guessed that we will fail to contact her, but that isn't the point. The point is that ghost!Calliope said past!Calliope contacted future!Jane, and while the perspective is switched to Jane, while she will miss (or ignore) Roxy, she will be successfully contacted by Calliope. Given the situation, I think it is likely Calliope will explain Jane's role to her in order for Jane to better understand herself. So get your notepads ready! Of course I am possibly being too hopeful, but hey, given that Jade/Jane parallel I posted about earlier, Jade finally started growing into her role after being contacted by two Karkats at once, one who tried to be an asshole and another who tired to be nice. I think I don't need to remind anyone about the Karkat/Caltwins parallels (red herrings) and Jane has already been contacted by Caliborn, talking to Calliope and beginning her growth into her role would bring the parallel fullcircle (sort of)." So I am just bringing this up so if it turns out I am right that we can possibly prepare to deal with it. - The Light6 (talk) 16:17, December 30, 2012 (UTC) :If this does happen soon, I'll be right on it. 22:13, December 30, 2012 (UTC) ::Anyhow it seems we might be getting class exposition even sooner than I expected, except about Page, and from Caliborn of all characters. But anyhow given the 50 page gap between exposition on Rogue/Thief and Bard/Prince, if we are getting Page exposition I think that means there is little doubt we will be Maid exposition soon. ::But anyhow my point in making this was that it won't only be Maid/Maid-counterpart that need to be sorted, disproven speculation will need to be removed from other sections and than those sections cleaned up accordingly. On that note, considering Sylph/Maid is a popular theorised pairing (with them both healing/repairing) I am surprised there doesn't seem to be a single mention of it in the article. - The Light6 (talk) 03:57, December 31, 2012 (UTC) ::Excuse the intrusion here, but where was it ever said that Maids heal or repair? 06:18, December 31, 2012 (UTC) :::No because they haven't been explained. However Aranea, a Sylph, offered to heal Terezi and her Peanuts styled exposition stand replaced the phrase "The doctor is in" with "The sylph is in". And speculation about Maid has Aradia healing the timeline because unlike Dave she didn't work with stable loops but instead the timeline split and then she repaired it. - The Light6 (talk) 07:44, December 31, 2012 (UTC) So the Jane/Calliope convo did happen, it is just that nothing was discussed. It appears I suck at making predictions. - The Light6 (talk) 06:57, January 6, 2013 (UTC) This IS, however, the 11th time Jane has been called an Heiress, hinting further at the class pairing of Heir/Maid. It was used twice in reference to Feferi (a Witch), and thrice in reference to Meenah (a Thief). Meenah's cases are irrelevant, because Thief/Rogue is already a pairing, and in Feferi's case the word was only used twice. Plus, it doesn't get much clearer than " " 07:18, January 6, 2013 (UTC) Speculation subsections Well really while we are supposed to document facts, in some cases such as this page, speculation should be included. That being said, while we have done good at making sure something is stated as speculation, most of the speculation is mixed in with the facts. This can be very misleading to readers. As such speculation should be moved into their own separate sections as I have done with Sylph and Witch. This will allow the facts and speculation to be cleaned up separately without having to worry about reordering information while working on a section. Also it allows easy removal of speculation when more canon information becomes available. Obviously paired classes (Rogue/Thief, Bard/Prince) shouldn't have speculation sections because they have already been explained (with the exception of Muse/Lord but I'll get to that later). That means Knight, Maid, Mage, Heir and Page need to be cleaned up. Seer however doesn't need to be cleaned up as it has no speculation with it (it does have that point about Mages but it never goes right out and says Mage is a potential active counterpart), however there is speculation about Seer in the other classes (like Mage) so it could probably be expanded, that would then necessitate a speculation section for it. As for Muse and Lord, while we don't know much about what they do, we do have a bunch of technical details about them so they shouldn't require a speculation section, however if enough speculation exists for them it should be split off to a speculation subsection. - The Light6 (talk) 11:33, January 6, 2013 (UTC) Scale Given a lack of an introductory image, and the low possibility that a suitable will ever occur, I propose using the scale in its stead, however at the moment the scale is presented with an statement explaining it, with design I am proposing it will lose that statement. So we should hold off making such a change until more is known about the scale so that the lead-in text is no longer needed. (Also if you haven't guessed, I totally intend to do it anyhow at a later point, just the statement thing is making me hold off until it can be done and I am writing this just to put the modified scale up so I don't have to make it later) - The Light6 (talk) 09:56, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah I just re-worded the article intro and made recursive tables in order to add a note and make it make sense in context. - The Light6 (talk) 12:25, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :So just having a thought, while discussion about the scale usually infers from Hussie's statement that +4 is female and -5 is male. So far I've left that off the scale on the page. However given the highly speculatory nature of a large chuck of the article I wonder if it worth updating the table to mention the inference? Given the space restrictions due to too much text unnecessarily stretching the table the shortest description that conveys this and its speculatory nature should be used, for example: "Implied to be a female class but unconfirmed". This is the shortest I can make it, while I would prefer it to reference Hussie's statement, I can't do that without almost doubling the length of the description. So the question is; do you feel the inference should be mentioned and do you feel that description conveys enough information about the situation? :Also updated the scale here on the talk page to show the hypothetical modification. - The Light6 (talk) 16:03, February 3, 2013 (UTC) ::Also had to update the other statements. - The Light6 (talk) 16:08, February 3, 2013 (UTC) ::I think quoting Hussie exactly would be fine as long as it's NEXT TO the table, as opposed to actually being a part of it. Because then it wouldn't be taking up too much space. 16:44, February 3, 2013 (UTC) :::I didn't want to quote Hussie, just reference his statement, his statement was purely about +6, +5 and -6, I wanted to reference it in the inferences you can make from that, e.g. something like; "Given Hussie's statement about +6 and +5, it could be inferred that +4 is female". - The Light6 (talk) 16:51, February 3, 2013 (UTC) So Rufioh is the Rogue of Breath. Since everybody, except Meenah, from the A1 trolls seemed to be in a romantic relationship with Rufioh, you could say he TOOK THEIR BRATH AWAY! (ba dum tss) For the benefit of the whole party, no less. *wink* Bananadrama (talk) 16:13, February 1, 2013 (UTC) :Well only Damara and Horuss were ever stated to be in a relationship with him, everyone else (except Meenah) just had the hots for him, but that is just a minor detail. Also I am fairly sure the joke about Rufioh taking people's breaths away was actually in Openbound. - The Light6 (talk) 16:03, February 3, 2013 (UTC) Mages and Seers :Moved to Forum:Classes - Part 2 - The Light6 (talk) 01:03, February 9, 2013 (UTC) Class: Passive & Active Categorization :Moved to Forum:Classes - Part 2 - The Light6 (talk) 05:58, February 11, 2013 (UTC)